Social work by deception

Disillusioned and Unregistered - tales of social work

“Idealism is what precedes experience, cynicism is what follows” D Wolf

Social work by deception:

My decision to qualify as a social worker was predicated on a genuine and heartfelt liking for children and their families and also a belief I could help the people I came into contact with. My vision was of acting somewhat like a bridge between people and the challenges they experienced. Whilst recognising people faced difficulties/challenges and these were somehow, linked to the system in place, my understanding at this juncture was very limited. Still my naivety and arrogance knew no bounds and I had swallowed the lie, the difficulties people experienced were their responsibility and were as a result of their lack of ambition, motivation and education. I learnt later however this is a psychological tactic and akin to blaming the victim.

What I was unaware of at that time was the mechanism, whereby local authority social services, could intervene/interfere in the public’s private affairs especially when it came to issues of parenting. The mechanism used is commonly known as a “birth certificate” Parents register their children and in return are given a copy of an entry in a register this is the “birth certificate” It is not the original birth certificate and neither is it a certificate of live birth, which is a different kind of document altogether. The copy of the birth certificate states it cannot be used as evidence of identity.

Whilst having a copy of a birth certificate may seem harmless enough, it begs the question why are parents only given a copy and if it is not evidence of identity then what is it. Also why are parents not given a certificate of live birth?

Birth certificates are held by the Crown under copyright. Who is the Crown and why should parents register their children with the Crown. If you believe the Crown is Elisabeth II of the House of Windsor, ask yourself why does, Elisabeth II of the House of Windsor need the original birth certificates of all children born in the countries of which she is head of state.

Registration comes from the Latin word Regis. Rex/ Regina are Latin words for a King or Queen respectively also known as the monarch/crown. Therefore whatever is registered is deemed as belonging to the monarch/crown. 

As the Crown holds the original birth certificate it has ownership of the goods or stock/property named on that certificate. When we think of the Crown we are led to believe this is Elisabeth II of the House of Windsor, this is only partially true. Elisabeth II of the House of Windsor is the face of the Crown Corporation presented to the public and misunderstood by them to be the ornamental bauble worn on her head. The Crown Corporation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crown) is based in the square mile of the City of London. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London_Corporation)

Why would the Crown Corporation need to have original birth certificates?

Presumably it is because the birth certificate represents “livestock” and as such and in due course the “live stock” at the age of majority, will have duties and responsibilities levied against it via the creation and operation of what is “uncommonly known” as a Strawman. Duties and responsibilities are mostly always of a financial nature. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME7K6P7hlko

What parents are not told is that the act of registering a child creates a contract and their children belong legally, to the Crown Corporation. This gives local authorities the mandate to intervene / interfere and remove your children if they deem your parenting is not good enough according to the rules they themselves have created.

In order for a contract to be valid however, it has to include specific criteria namely, there has to be full disclosure, equal consideration, the full consent of both parties with the contract being hand signed by both parties. 

Are parents, given full disclosure as to the implications of registering their children with the Crown?

What does the Crown offer as equal consideration?

Was the informed and full consent of the parents gained?

Was the contract hand signed by both parties?

Is it possible the birth certificate is really a receipt showing the holder has a share in the common wealth of the piece of earth known as England?

The common wealth, being derived, from the natural resources and sweat equity, of sovereign, living, breathing, flesh and blood human beings inhabiting the piece of earth known as England.

However via a sleight of hand, to put it mildly, the owners of the Crown Corporation have tricked and deceived the population and have stolen and coveted the wealth for themselves claiming falsely the common wealth belongs to them and the rest of the population has to pay them to use it so that they may live. Does anyone see anything wrong with this picture?